Context: This dispute dates back to January 2022, when Nike sued lululemon and Mirror maker Curiouser Products Inc. in the Southern District of New York, accusing the companies of infringing six patents covering fitness-tracking technology used in the Mirror home gym and its companion app, including features for monitoring a user’s exertion level and performance. lululemon responded by taking all six patents to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for inter partes review, and the fight ran through multiple forums from there. Earlier this year, the Southern District of New York invalidated key claims of a Nike patent asserted against lululemon’s Mirror home gym (April 1, 2026 ip fray article). That ruling came on top of a string of PTAB decisions issued between 2023 and 2024 that found many claims across the six Nike patents at issue unpatentable, plus a Federal Circuit ruling in August 2026 affirming that 13 of the 19 claims in Nike’s U.S. Patent No. 8,620,413 (“Adaptive watch”), covering a sports watch with heart rate and speed sensors, are unpatentable.
To Read The Full Story
Continue reading your article with a Membership
Counsel
Counsel for Nike: Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP’s Michael J. Harris, Aaron P. Bowling, Christopher J. Renk, Michael J. Sebba, and Kathleen Duffy Lichtenstein.
Counsel for lululemon and Curiouser Products: Morrison & Foerster LLP’s Kyle W. Mooney.